Brian Cox remarks about Donald Trump date to January 20, 2025, before his second inauguration. In a Good Morning Britain interview, the Succession star expressed concern about women’s position in American politics and described Trump as a convicted criminal and a liar.
The date is essential context. This was Cox reacting to Trump’s 2024 election victory, not a new statement about events in September 2026. His comments mixed a checkable fact about a criminal conviction with broader political judgments about Trump and the voters who supported him.
Cox told hosts Susanna Reid and Richard Madeley that he believed women were being marginalized in America. When Madeley noted that millions of women had voted for Trump, Cox said he thought there was a lack of awareness about the choice. He then used the words “convicted criminal” and “known liar” to criticize the incoming president.
Brian Cox remarks about Trump in context
The actor’s central concern in the interview was how women were being treated. He referred to abortion rights and the election defeats of Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris while describing what he saw as an antifeminist trend. Those statements reflected his interpretation of U.S. politics, not a measurement of what all women believed or why they voted.
Madeley challenged Cox by pointing to women who supported Trump. Cox’s reply suggested those voters did not understand the consequences of their decision. Some viewers objected to that framing as condescending. The existence of women who voted for Trump is clear, but their reasons cannot be reduced to a single explanation on the basis of Cox’s remarks.
The Brian Cox remarks can be discussed on their merits. Readers can share his concerns about women’s rights, disagree with his assessment of voters or hold both views at once. The exchange should be described as a January 2025 interview rather than presented as a fresh response to Trump’s current presidency.
The conviction behind his description
The “convicted criminal” part of Cox’s description refers to a real New York criminal case. A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in May 2024. The court sentenced him in January 2025 to an unconditional discharge, leaving the conviction in place without jail time or a fine.
Trump denies wrongdoing and has sought to overturn the verdict. On August 28, 2026, a federal judge rejected his latest attempt to move the already decided state case into federal court. The judge’s order stated that Trump’s appeal of the state conviction was pending in New York’s Appellate Division at the time.
That federal decision was a ruling about moving the case, not a new trial on the 34 counts. It did not erase the conviction. Trump’s lawyers indicated they would appeal the federal ruling, while his challenge to the state conviction continued separately.
Cox had factual grounds to call Trump convicted when he spoke in January 2025, and the conviction had not been set aside in the August 2026 ruling. It remains important to mention the unconditional discharge and ongoing appeals so readers understand the legal status without assuming Trump served a prison sentence.
A factual claim and a political judgment
Cox’s use of “liar” and “known liar” is different from describing the jury verdict. It is his broad assessment of Trump’s credibility. A reporter can test a particular statement against evidence, but this interview did not identify and examine a specific Trump statement to establish that broader label.
Trump and his legal team have argued that the New York prosecution was politically motivated. Some viewers also rejected Cox’s characterization of women who voted for Trump. Those responses do not change the jury’s verdict, but they are part of the public dispute around his remarks and the case.
The clearest reading of the Brian Cox remarks is that he was making an argument about trust, women’s rights and a president-elect he strongly opposed. The verified event is his January 20, 2025 television appearance. The conviction is a documented court outcome subject to appeal. Whether Cox’s wider criticism is persuasive is a question for readers to judge, using specific evidence rather than treating every phrase in a celebrity’s opinion as a court finding.
